Where The Newspaper Stands

March 01, 2004

The reservoir

Newport News-VMRC deal a promising (new) start

Kudos to the Virginia Marine Resources Commission for agreeing to hold a new hearing on the city of Newport News' application for a permit it needs to build the King William Reservoir. Although the deal was struck with the city's lawsuit to force a hearing hanging over the commission's head, and negotiated with the attorney general's office involved, it nevertheless reflects a certain spirit of compromise. (The commission accomplished its goal of dodging a court order forcing a hearing, which seemed imminent after a court ruled that the city should get one. In exchange for the agreement, the city will drop its suit.) The fact that the commission's agreement was unanimous is a good sign.

Citizens can only hope that the willingness to hold another hearing is accompanied by a real willingness to reconsider -- with open minds -- the merits of the project. And to do so with a finely tuned appreciation of the role of the commission, which must be to rule in the public's interest, not solely the interest of fisheries and those who depend on them. The decision facing the commission requires something of a balancing act, and it must give due consideration to all the competing interests, to the region's need for water as well as to the need to protect fish.

The commission, in essence, has the region's future on its agenda, for without the permit to draw water from the Mattaponi River, the reservoir as now conceived could well be dead. Buried with it would be the best approach to meeting the region's long-term water supply.

The deal the commission and the city struck will yield a process that addresses some of the problems with the hearing that resulted in last year's denial of the permit. In the new hearing, there will be opportunities for the city to question state experts. The questioning will help sort through the complicated and sometimes contradictory science invoked.

The new hearing will focus on what has become the sticking point, the effect on fisheries, but not on other environmental or cultural issues, which have been addressed in other arenas. It will eliminate a lot of the emotional appeals that lack substantive merit but have tended to take center stage. The argument that the new procedure shuts out public commentary is a red herring: The public has had ample opportunities to be heard in the long and involved reservoir approval process.

One reason an open-minded commission is essential is that Newport News has said it is willing to change its application to address the concerns of the commission and fisheries advocates. If the issue at hand is protecting fish, and the city is willing to do that -- by not drawing water during spawning season, for example, and designing a fish-friendly intake -- then the objections that doomed the permit in the last go-round may be satisfied.

The commission did the right thing by agreeing to reconsider a matter that has tremendous importance to the region. With the city, it devised a process that is better than the last. That's a fine beginning.

Who knows, in this spirit, perhaps the city and the commission could also agree on a reservoir design that allows the project to go forward but meets the commission's concerns.

Voting

Getting involved is good -- but in what community?

College students fit -- or are on their way to fitting -- the ideal voter that Thomas Jefferson had in mind when he and his brethren were designing our systems of government and education. They have one prerequisite Jefferson knew was critical to the success of democracy: education.

The other prerequisite for citizenship -- involvement -- is more problematic. The Virginia21 campaign is trying to address that by encouraging young people to register to vote. If enough do, here and in other states, they could be a factor in choosing the next president and in civic life on the state and local level.

Educating young people is a long, difficult process. Getting them involved shouldn't be, at least when it comes to making it easy to vote.

The question is, vote where?

Students must meet the requirement Virginia imposes on every person who wants to vote: They can register where they are domiciled, which means "a person must live in a particular location with the intent to remain there for an unlimited time." That said, the state board of election acknowledges that for college students, determining legal residence can be tricky, especially in the transition between their parents' homes and the place they launch their independent lives.

That's why there's controversy in Williamsburg over registering students. The registrar is trying to screen some students to see if they meet some not-well-defined standard for eligibility. The American Civil Liberties Union is aghast.

The registrar's obligation is to make registration as accessible as possible, consistent with state code. The state offers a brief list of considerations in establishing a student's legal residence: